Power In Sexual Relationships | Page 6

the
rise of fundamentalisms. We must prob-
lematize sexuality more broadly if we
are to design investigations that are not
blind to these phenomena.
We must rethink our intervention strategies
and research methodologies
The interventions, as Blanc’s paper
points out, range on a continuum from
providing information to transforming
community norms. Yet if we treat power
as a form of structural organization, Par-
kerasserted, then we must start thinking
about structural interventions. He also
called into doubt some of the faith that
we place in measurement and in random-
ized control trials; he suggested that the
8
2Examples include Kennedy and Davis’s study of butch-femme relations in Buffalo (Elizabeth Lapovsky
Kennedy and Madeline D. Davis.
l993. Boots of Leather, Slippers of Gold: The History of a Lesbian Community.
New York: Penguin Books), Annick Prieur’s work on transgender sex workers and their partners in
Mexico City (Annick Prieur.
l998. Mema’s House, Mexico City: On Transvestites, Queens, and Machos.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press), and essays in Murray and Roscoe’s collection on boy wives
and female husbands in sub-Saharan Africa (Stephen O. Murray and Will Roscoe [eds.].
l998.
Boy-Wives and Female Husbands: Studies of African Homosexualities. New York: St. Martin’s Press).

randomized control trial, which was de-
signed as a way of testing the efficacy of
different kinds of medications and
medical procedures, has been somewhat
uncritically adapted and applied to re-
search on social change in ways that need
to be questioned. Finally, Parker argued
that the individual should not be seen as
the only unit of investigation and analy-
sis, but that dyads, couples, and com-
munities should also be considered.
The political dimensions of relationships
must be acknowledged
Sexual and reproductive rightsare as
important as sexual and reproductive
health if we want to understand what
power is and how it works in sexual rela-
tionships. What we are looking at are
politicalissues and politicalchanges, and
that is where an understanding of power
and an understanding of how to change
inequality fundamentally lies.
Parker ended by saying that if we can
move forward in relation to these issues,
we will also move forward in terms of
building a comprehensive understand-
ing of power and how it works, and of
thinking about how we might be able to
shift the unequal balance of power
more effectively.
Power differentials between men
and women can and must be practi-
cally addressed in service programs
(Discussant #2, Jeff Spieler)
JeffSpieler, of the United States
Agency for International Development(USAID) Office of Population, offered
a practical discussion of Blanc’s paper.
Claiming that unwanted pregnancy,
STIs, and HIV/AIDS are the greatest
threats to reproductive health today,
and that infrequency of condom use is
the primary barrier to the prevention of
HIV, Spieler underlined the need to
address gender-based imbalances within
sexual relations. Power differentials
between men and women profoundly
affect the ability of women to negotiate
condom use.
The stigmatization of condoms,
because of an association with illicit
sex, promiscuity, and a reduction in sex-
ual spontaneity and pleasure, is a major
barrier to condom use. These stigmas
are especially harmful to women, who
often lack the power to negotiate con-
dom use for any act let alone for every
act of intercourse. Unless condoms are
disassociated from negative implica-
tions such as multiple partners, this
necessary de-stigmatization will not
take place. One way to achieve this dis-
association, Spieler argued, is to pro-
mote condoms as effective methods for
both pregnancy and disease prevention.
Preliminary evidence shows that even
high-risk groups such as sex workers
have been more consistent and correct
in their condom use if they are using
them primarily for pregnancy preven-
tion rather than for STI prevention.
3
To understand the barriers to con-
dom use, we must consider the social
9
3Mathias Aklilu et al. 200l. “Factors associated with HIV-1infection among sex workers of Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia,”AIDS
l5(l): 87–96.

construction of masculinity in many of
the societies with which we are dealing
where the problems are greatest. Spieler
highlighted Blanc’s argument that male
identity is often associated with power,
self-reliance, and risk-taking, which
contributes to men’s own vulnerability
to HIV/AIDS. Women, on the other
hand, are expected to be ignorant of
sexual matters, and thus are often inad-
equately informed about preventive
methods. Even those women who do
have access to information are not fully
able to negotiate protection, whether
by insisting on condom use or refusing
sex. Several studies conducted in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo
(formerly Zaire), Uganda, and Rwanda
underline this imbalance, showing that
condom use is significantly higher
among couples where the woman is
HIV-positive, as opposed to those cou-
ples where the male is infected. This
inability to negotiate is closely linked
to women’s inferior economic situation:
women’s frequent dependency on men
renders them more likely to fear aban-
donment and the destitution that
might ensue as a result of confronting
or leaving their partners.
Spieler concluded by saying that
condom promotion strategies must be
innovative, as we face an uphill battle to
get men and women to use a product
that many are unwilling or unable to
use. Research on the relationship be-
tween power and sexuality has been
limited because power has been a diffi-
cult concept to quantify and define. Yetwhat is clear from recent programs is
that these socially instilled gender
imbalances are not impermeable to
change, and programs have to develop
creative strategies to reach men.
Power in sexual relationships is
inextricably linked to the balance
of power between men and women
and wider considerations of equity
in development (Discussant
#3,
Geeta Rao Gupta)
Geeta Rao Gupta, of the International
Center for Research on Women, began
her presentation by